If the President, Vice President, or a member of the Senate does not post on in 21 the Atlas Fantasy Government board for seven consecutive days (168 hours) without posting a leave of absence an article of impeachment shall be automatically placed before Senate in accordance with Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution and thus considered accordingly.

Having failed to post on the Fantasy Government for eight consecutive days (184 hours; from December 03, 2014, 08:32:09 pm to December 11, 2014, 12:14:33 pm), an article of impeachment shall be automatically placed before Senate in accordance with Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution and thus considered accordingly.

While I recognize that I haven't been engaged with the Senate, I have done my best to remain active during some particularly busy days for me, and I believe this impeachment effort by Griffin to be nothing more than a publicity stunt.

I strongly believe that no impeachable offenses were committed by me and the Vice-President, and I humbly ask the Senate to reject these articles of impeachment.

I won't vote to impeach Senator Lumine.This isn't his duty to participate in the senate threads, although he of course can. What he has to do is to sign bills or redraft. No bill had passed during this period, so he had nothing to do.So this will be a Nay,Especially considering he has been active with his ISIS stuff

EDIT: And, Griffin did nothing wrong, he just respected the constitution. So, no need to attack him.

I'll just say that I've never directly called for the President to be removed from office, but I'm incensed at the level of whining for merely following the Constitution and introducing these impeachment articles. Of course they deserved to be introduced by someone - anyone - because that is the law. Federal officeholders swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, after all. If the game worked as intended, then they would automatically manifest via robot (Yankee?) as the law states. Nobody was upset in the past about these articles of impeachment being introduced for other Senators who didn't engage on the FG board but who did on the FE board (Xahar).

This particular article and clause has been finely tuned multiple times over the year and is purposefully designed to be the way it is; officeholders have to engage on the Government board, as that is where the actual decision-making and game play really occur. A message needs to be sent to all Senators, the President and the Vice-President that their continued and active presence on this board is required, regardless of whatever excuses ("my role has been changed", "I have real life unlike everyone else", "I posted on the FE board", etc) may be. These people should spend more time reflecting on how they are letting the electorate down and less time blaming me or anyone else for their failings.

While I believe the President should be more active in commenting on the Senate's proceedings, this impeachment proceeding has only been brought because the President has made his thread on the Elections board his primary office rather than the Government board. I don't believe he should be punished for choosing to more actively engage with the citizens than his predecessors.

I have to say, I doubt that I posted every seven days in the FG board in my time as President. There is just not so much to do here if you, as BK stated, communicate more with all citizens and let the Senate do its business alone.I have absolutely no intention to vote for this impeachment.

While I recognize that I haven't been engaged with the Senate, I have done my best to remain active during some particularly busy days for me, and I believe this impeachment effort by Griffin to be nothing more than a publicity stunt.

I strongly believe that no impeachable offenses were committed by me and the Vice-President, and I humbly ask the Senate to reject these articles of impeachment.

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.

While I recognize that I haven't been engaged with the Senate, I have done my best to remain active during some particularly busy days for me, and I believe this impeachment effort by Griffin to be nothing more than a publicity stunt.

I strongly believe that no impeachable offenses were committed by me and the Vice-President, and I humbly ask the Senate to reject these articles of impeachment.

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.

Impeachement is a serious charge, but it must be considered that it does put the process in motion it does not specify the end result (removal). The process occurring as an automatic trigger and thus creating the potential for removal, is suppose to act as the inducement for the PResident to conform to the standard applied in the text. The President can make a case as to why he should not be impeached and the Senate has the discretion to decline to do so.

I think that when it comes to the fact that the impeachement is not gone through with and seeing that as a disappointment, misses the fact that using impeachment in this instance is a novel occurence and that the end goal is to induce the activity. The mood of the Senators can be hard to predict and thus to avoid the risk of a Senate with seven Windjammers on issue voting for the obvious result, compliance would be the regular approach. That was my understanding when I voted for the amendments that established this process. In every other case, the end goal of impeachement is to punish for an offense that has been committed. One requires impeachment to actually be carried through with, whilst the other does not necessarily do likewise.

Impeachement is a serious charge, but it must be considered that it does put the process in motion it does not specify the end result (removal). The process occurring as an automatic trigger and thus creating the potential for removal, is suppose to act as the inducement for the PResident to conform to the standard applied in the text. The President can make a case as to why he should not be impeached and the Senate has the discretion to decline to do so.

I think that when it comes to the fact that the impeachement is not gone through with and seeing that as a disappointment, misses the fact that using impeachment in this instance is a novel occurence and that the end goal is to induce the activity. The mood of the Senators can be hard to predict and thus to avoid the risk of a Senate with seven Windjammers on issue voting for the obvious result, compliance would be the regular approach. That was my understanding when I voted for the amendments that established this process. In every other case, the end goal of impeachement is to punish for an offense that has been committed. One requires impeachment to actually be carried through with, whilst the other does not necessarily do likewise.